Garth Brooks: [Apple’s iTunes] is killing music

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by jaw04005, Oct 15, 2009.

  1. jaw04005 macrumors 601

    jaw04005

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    AR
    #1
    On iTunes, which Brooks doesn't allow to sell his music:

    BROOKS:

    "Sweet guys. They've allowed me to come into their building several times and pretty much tell them how much I didn't like the system. They listen. But iTunes won't do what (it) needs to until (musicians) find a way to join together, and show them what an iPod sounds like with no music. … They truly think that they're saving music. I looked at them right across the table with all the love in the world and told them they were killing it. Until we get variable pricing, until we get album-only (downloads), then they are not a true retailer for my stuff, and you won't see my stuff on there.”

    Would he start his own label or circumvent the industry?

    BROOKS:

    "No one person is bigger than the system. And my thing is instead of saying, 'Screw the system, I'm doing things this way,' my thing is always, 'Let's (work) together.' I'd love to see us get it together, and that's one of the things for the next five years is to try and figure out how. Athletics has it — anti-trust. That's the only way these guys get the attention of the leagues they work for. Until we can unionize, until we can bond together, we have no power."

    Does he want the music industry to be exempt from anti-trust laws like professional sports teams?

    BROOKS:

    "I want us to be able to come together and represent as a whole to tell the nation. … Our government's not doing anything about piracy. Until we can hear what a day of radio is like with no music, until this place sits silent because the music creators and the artists and copyright (holders) are not happy because they're not being protected like everyone else is, then, yeah, I would like that power myself. It has to be placed in the right hands, so it can't be one person, but a board that represents music, its creators and its content owners. I think that'd be more than fair to stand up and say, 'Look, you've ignored us, because there's 50,000 of us and 300 million voters. You've ignored us, and now to show you, we would like to just simply stop for a day,' and see how dry this world gets.”

    http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2009-10-15-garth-brooks-quote_N.htm

    What an idiot. :rolleyes: Brooks is what’s wrong with the music industry.

    By the way, I suggest ‘The Thunder Rolls’ and ‘The Dance’ both available exclusively on Limewire.
     
  2. Steve1496 macrumors 6502a

    Steve1496

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2004
    #2
    He doesn't get it. If people are forced to pay for the whole album which has only one song they like, they will simply obtain the song illegally.

    The music industry is changing and Brooks doesn't want to change with it.

    Steve
     
  3. jabrowntx macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2007
    #3
    How many artists anymore are truly album artists? I don't think there are very many. A lot of people these days don't want ALBUMS -- they want good songs. When I buy albums, it's only "Best of" albums so I don't have to pay for an artists junk or experimental stuff.
     
  4. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #4
    Garth Brooks killed music long before iTunes arrived on the scene.
     
  5. petermcphee macrumors 6502a

    petermcphee

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2008
    #5
    I must respectfully disagree. I think it would be beneficial for certain artists (read: not all artists) to be able to sell their albums as a package rather than simply the most popular single. If that's for monetary or artistic reasons, it seems to me that this should be an option for those selling on iTunes.

    But I recognize that this viewpoint may not be that of the masses. No disrespect.
     
  6. Kallel00 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2009
  7. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #7
    Well then they would need to be releasing albums. Not this 3-good-songs-plus-filler crap that has no flow to it whatsoever.
     
  8. puma1552 macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #8
    They already can do that...??? Many a full album for sale on iTunes, and more to come with the LP stuff.

    But to echo the sentiment above, Brooks doesn't get it. Forcing us to buy whole albums? Forget it.

    My days of buying a whole album and being forced to get all the junk songs just to get one or two good ones are over, thank god.
     
  9. jaw04005 thread starter macrumors 601

    jaw04005

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2003
    Location:
    AR
    #9
    Personally, I want my iTunes experience to be same across the board.

    It has hurt consumers every single time Apple’s let the labels talk them into something (the move from 7 to 5 authorizations, variable album pricing, variable song pricing, ‘album only’ songs, etc).
     
  10. Keebler macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2005
    Location:
    Canada
    #10
    it's too bad a study couldn't be done to show the revenue gained for certain artists by having their stuff on itunes. that might show him the way. if they did 'album only' dloads - i'd be gone in a heartbeat from itunes. i like being able to choose the better songs instead of paying for something i'm going to skip over :)
     
  11. Randman macrumors 65816

    Randman

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2008
    Location:
    Jacksonville, Fla
    #11
    Maybe he should do another Chris Gaines album ...
     
  12. minlshaw macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2009
    #12
    Well (and this is coming from a fan of Garth's), remember this is the same guy who tried to thwart used CD sales nearly 20 years ago. And, on paper, to an extent, he's right. When an entire album goes platinum, every session player and songwriter is entitled to royalties (the poor collection and distribution of which, is another debate). When fans cherry-pick specific songs, only those players and writers are entitled to royalties.

    I side with the artists on one issue, at least. I have grown very tired hearing people look at a CD and declare that "There's only one or two good songs on here." What that really means is, "I've only heard one or two songs on here." Typically, this is because those people only hear what singles are pushed on radio or get exposure online. Many a time, I've bought an album and been disappointed by which album cuts were passed over as singles, and I know I'm not alone in this.

    Now, here's the thing I would say to Garth about this. Firstly, as others have noted, digital sales can easily be restricted to entire album purchases. Secondly, while I appreciate his point about how useless radio and iPods would be with no music playing, I would ask him how relevant an artist's work is with no audience to appreciate it. See, it cuts both ways.

    I could even understand it if Garth's only concern was piracy, but he seems not to get the value of music portability (carrying an iPod the size of a cassette is much easier than even an album of CD's), or the appeal of customizability. Mix tapes pre-date the digital world anyway, so it seems rather pointless to resist them at this point. Just the other night, I made a playlist in my iTunes library of Garth songs appropriate for an insomniac. And Garth? I bought all the CD's brand new--even double-dipping for both boxed sets. And if you want to get into the nitty gritty, how about including a 12-track version of The Lost Sessions in your second boxed set just three months before issuing a 17-track standalone version?
     
  13. GermanSuplex macrumors 6502a

    GermanSuplex

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    #13
    Exactly.

    There's so much wrong with what Garth Brooks is saying my head is spinning trying to find out where to start.

    But it basically boils down to just that. Albums are outdated. Not the concept, really, but the distribution method. You're going to change or you're not, but either way, you're not hurting Apple, just the consumer and yourself.
     
  14. SpaceKitty macrumors 68040

    SpaceKitty

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2008
    Location:
    Fort Collins Colorado
    #14
    How about everyone boycott Garth Brooks music. I don't like him myself. I see he's not on iTunes and that's OK with me.
     
  15. puma1552 macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #15
    I see your thinking, and I like it, but on the above issue--true, there are many songs on other albums that never made it to singles that were great--Better Than Ezra's "A Southern Thing" comes to mind--but why should we have to pay $15 just to find out that nine out of ten times, the rest of the songs on the album DO suck as our suspicions confirmed?
     
  16. andrew upstairs macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2009
    Location:
    Downtown Los Angeles
    #16
    Instead of album-only downloads, they should just give extra tracks to those who download the album.

    Oh wait, they already do that.
     
  17. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #17
    Don't buy from artists who put junk on their albums? Seems to work for me. ;)

    While I am more of an album person, I think it's great that iTunes gives people the choice instead of forcing them to buy the entire album. No reason why this should change.
     
  18. texasmccoy macrumors member

    texasmccoy

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2010
    Location:
    Northern California
    #18
    No longer a fan

    The only thing Garth Brooks cares about is Garth Brooks (and making money, of course). He's not a real musician at heart. Trying to ban profit-free used CD sales & the fact his music is almost impossible to find in downloadable digital format just goes to show that he's trying as hard as he can not to let anyone acquire his music without him making a profit. True musicians know that peoples love of their music is the most important aspect, not the money it generates, which is just a peripheral benefit.

    In my opinion, he’s overrated and has become so arrogant it’s disgusting.
    The more talented always seem to be more humble.

    Garth Brooks pitched a fit over used CD sales. He said that he should get more money when a used CD was resold. He made a comment that he’d made “more money than my grandchildren can spend.” But yet in other instances he speaks of parenthood and how one of the biggest challenges is raising his children not to be spoiled, and to make their own way in the world. He's a hypocrite.

    Remember the old saying, "Don't bite the hand that feeds you"? Well, Garth Brooks has obviously bitten the hands that feed him (the fans). If he makes any comebacks, it is only for himself, not his fans. Fans can pick up on that real fast and now many couldn't care less whether he comes back or stays gone. I am not going to get my hands bitten anymore. I have better things to spend my money on than his nonsense.

    All of this is quite sad, really, because I used to really like his music. Not anymore :(
     
  19. UpDownAeroplane macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 21, 2010
    #19
    if only one or two good songs are on albums you are buying, you are listening to terrible music.
     

Share This Page